If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

But early Monday morning, before the president dawned his kaftan made from the hides of infant seals and even before he drank his full chalice of goat’s blood, he was up angry-tweeting in a full sweaty rage. Also, because this tweet went out in the morning, presumably he didn’t have time to wake his Russian hooker to see if she could spellcheck it for him, so the president tweeted this:

Trump is getting ready to fold like a lawn chair that can’t spell and of course. the internet is having a field day with this dumbass president. Below are a few of my favorites.

So when I did a Google search for "Trump" this ^^ was returned as a top news story.

No I didn't make this up.

T

...

1 like

Comment

I keep seeing all of this talk from the left about Trump facing impeachment and criminal prosecution due to the latest charges against Cohen. I am assuming it is for campaign finance violations since that is the only crime that can be construed from these charges?

First of all, Cohen had nothing to do with the Trump campaign. Cohen was Trump's personal lawyer. As such, Cohen had made these type of payments on Trump's behalf several times prior to the campaign. Those two facts alone blow any case against Trump completely out of the water.

Even if, by some miraculous leap of faith, you get to Trump committing a campaign finance violation, since when has that been impeachable? Obama was found guilty of the largest campaign finance violation ever. Did he get impeached for that? Why would Trump be impeached for the same thing to a much lesser degree?

Am I missing something or is this Liberals final realizing there is no credible evidence of collusion against Trump, so they are grasping for anything that could resemble wrong-doing by Trump. Almost appears as this entire special counsel was a means to an end... Witch hunt is probably an appropriate classification!

Comment

You are 100% accurate. This is the final death throes of a failed attempt to overthrow an election. They have nothing so now they're coming back full circle to the campaign morality play where they cast Trump as the dirty philanderer who pays off women to keep them quiet. Unfortunately for them, it's not illegal and Conservatives have already demonstrated that they don't care about dirty Donald's past because his executive actions are those of one of the most conservative presidents in modern history. Isn't it funny watching the Atheist Left attack Trump on morality claims?

One thing you aren't seeing in the Liberal narrative which is hilarious is the fact that Trump's primary campaign was mostly self-funded. He spent like $66 million of his own money. Their continued howling of "campaign finance violation" is intended to give the impression that Trump was using other people's money to pay off whores in order to win the presidency when in actuality the worst thing he could ever be charged with is a reporting/process error, the penalty of which, is a fine.

The thing that these silly Libtards can never grasp is that their continued persecutions of a sitting president, unlike any other in history, has turned him into a martyr galvanizing his base in a way that borders on cult-like status. Every attack on the president is more and more perceived like a personal attack on Conservatives themselves and democracy as a whole. If the Liberal machine doesn't give up the coup and start to act like Americans again, we are headed for a serious conflict, that I assure you. Very dangerous precedents are being set.

Am I missing something or is this Liberals final realizing there is no credible evidence of collusion against Trump, so they are grasping for anything that could resemble wrong-doing by Trump. Almost appears as this entire special counsel was a means to an end... Witch hunt is probably an appropriate classification!

This is the type of thinking that I wish people would get past. This is what Trump wants you to think. Trump and his minions keep spreading this "witch hunt" propaganda so that if something eventually comes out, you all are ready to say "IT WAS A WITCH HUNT! I can't believe anything in that report!"

Why not just keep an open mind here? The witch hunt has already brought charges against many people who did bad things. Unquestionably, the people indicted so far should be indicted for their past actions. If that's it, then the witch hunt was a net positive for our society. If the report is bad against your guy, be willing to make a determination at that time. Either say "I don't believe those facts," "those facts don't warrant any particular action against Trump," or "wow, those facts are bad and I support x, y, or z action against Trump."

Why not just allow yourself that opportunity? The only benefit in calling it a witch hunt now is to further spread the propaganda to make the report less believable before you even know what is in the report. That's silly. There is absolutely no benefit in doing that. That's just sticking your head in the sand and shouting at the rest of us to do the same. There might not be anything in the report, but if there is, give yourself the chance to be on the right side of the debate.

Mueller isn't biased and he's not conflicted. This is not a witch hunt. It was an investigation put in place by Trump's own DOJ, and it was justified by the facts in place. The results so far should speak for themselves, and (while you cannot use results to later legally justify the initiation of an investigation) the results should highlight that an investigation was necessary. 30 people charged. Manafort convicted. Seven guilty pleas. Charges against a dozen Russian intelligence officers. And this is a witch hunt against Trump? C'mon...

@ jdshock - The reason I call it a Witch Hunt is because Liberals are doing the exact opposite of what you are saying should be done. They are calling for impeachment of the President and talking about criminal charges and jail time after his time in office with absolutely no facts to back it up. The is zero evidence of any wrongdoing in the charges to this point. I would say to you sir, follow your own advice and maybe it wouldn't be a WITCH HUNT!!!

Your last paragraph is laughable! There have been zero convictions for Russian collusion, there has been zero evidence of Russian collusion (except by Democrat operatives funded by the DNC, Hilary Clinton, and Obama). Comey admitted under oath last week that the FBI DID NOT follow procedure which REQUIRES them to verify and validate all information used in a FISA warrant, or THEY MUST LEAVE IT OUT OF THE FISA APPLICATION. In reality, nobody will ever be convicted for anything since it is all fruit of the poison tree. Those are the facts!

"The notion that FISA was abused here was nonsense." The notion is that the FISA application used unverified information (Steele Dossier). Comey admitted that the FBI had not verified the dossier, but they included it for the FISA warrant. If the FBI didn't follow the FISA procedure to verify the information submitted on the FISA application, then they absolutely, 100%, abused the FISA process.

New York Post
Former FBI Director James Comey admitted that the Bureau did not verify allegations in the Steele dossier before it was cited as grounds for snooping on a former Trump adviser in 2016. The admission came in closed-door testimony before congressional investigators that was made public Saturday evening.

You can google it and easily find every news agency other than the fake news organizations are reporting it from his testimony last week.

@ jdshock - The reason I call it a Witch Hunt is because Liberals are doing the exact opposite of what you are saying should be done. They are calling for impeachment of the President and talking about criminal charges and jail time after his time in office with absolutely no facts to back it up. The is zero evidence of any wrongdoing in the charges to this point. I would say to you sir, follow your own advice and maybe it wouldn't be a WITCH HUNT!!!

But "liberals" don't run the Mueller investigation. It's asinine to say the investigation is a witch hunt when you're saying liberals are getting giddy at the prospect of impeachment. Yeah, that's annoying and yeah I frequently tell liberals to cool their jets so they don't look foolish if the report comes out and there's literally nothing about Trump in there. That's not really a problem on this board, though. Follow my own advice? What are you talking about? Almost every post I've made on this subject for the past year has been "yeah, there might not be anything about Trump in there."

Your last paragraph is laughable! There have been zero convictions for Russian collusion, there has been zero evidence of Russian collusion (except by Democrat operatives funded by the DNC, Hilary Clinton, and Obama). Comey admitted under oath last week that the FBI DID NOT follow procedure which REQUIRES them to verify and validate all information used in a FISA warrant. In reality, nobody will ever be convicted for anything since it is all fruit of the poison tree. Those are the facts!

Comment

Liberals in Congress and in the media are constantly pushing that there is evidence Trump is guilty even though no evidence has been found at all. Even Comey admitted under oath, that at the time he was fired, he had seen no evidence of any Russian collusion on the part of the Trump campaign. So why do all these Liberals in Congress continue to talk about impeachment, charges, jail time. That is way worse behavior than POTUS calling it a witch hunt. At this point in time, the Democrats in Congress are lying more than POTUS is.

Off base huh? Please point to a conviction of Russian Collusion. Maybe I have missed it. Also, Comey either lied under oath last week in his testimony, or has no idea what he is talking about. He testified that FISA procedures were followed, but later admitted that he didn't know if the dossier was not verified or validated. FISA procedure includes that all evidence submitted for a FISA application must be verified and validated. Obviously the dossier was never verified or validated and they purposely withheld that information from the FISA court (or maybe they didn't know the Clinton campaign paid for it)???

So you believe all the information in the FISA warrant was legit even though nearly everyone involved has been fired, demoted, or discredited for their lies and bias by the DOJ and the FBI. Not Trump, not Nunes, not conservatives, the DOJ's own IG? Most of those charged have either considered withdrawing their coerced guilty pleas, received no jail time, or have filed lawsuits against the biased/conflicted special counsel for illegal tactics.

Manafort is the only one that actually committed a real crime and it was for events that took place long before he knew Trump and the DA already had the information and chose not to charge Manafort until the special counsel needed a "win" from his witch hunt.

Comment

So you believe all the information in the FISA warrant was legit even though nearly everyone involved has been fired, demoted, or discredited for their lies and bias by the DOJ and the FBI. Not Trump, not Nunes, not conservatives, the DOJ's own IG? Most of those charged have either considered withdrawing their coerced guilty pleas, received no jail time, or have filed lawsuits against the biased/conflicted special counsel for illegal tactics.

Manafort is the only one that actually committed a real crime and it was for events that took place long before he knew Trump and the DA already had the information and chose not to charge Manafort until the special counsel needed a "win" from his witch hunt.

I've said it over, and over, and over again. Seriously, it's in so many of my posts around here. Around 2 out of every 1,000 applications for FISA warrants are denied. I have a hard time believing that this particular application was more unfounded than 998 of 1000 applications.

Comment

I've said it over, and over, and over again. Seriously, it's in so many of my posts around here. Around 2 out of every 1,000 applications for FISA warrants are denied. I have a hard time believing that this particular application was more unfounded than 998 of 1000 applications.

And how many of the other 998 out of 1000 included opposition research paid for by an opposing candidate for POTUS that was purposely hidden by DOJ/FBI officials that have all since been fired? But yet you continue to believe this investigation is unbiased and not conflicted. Hmm maybe you are the one that needs to reconsider who you believe?

"The notion that FISA was abused here was nonsense." The notion is that the FISA application used unverified information (Steele Dossier). Comey admitted that the FBI had not verified the dossier, but they included it for the FISA warrant. If the FBI didn't follow the FISA procedure to verify the information submitted on the FISA application, then they absolutely, 100%, abused the FISA process.

New York Post
Former FBI Director James Comey admitted that the Bureau did not verify allegations in the Steele dossier before it was cited as grounds for snooping on a former Trump adviser in 2016. The admission came in closed-door testimony before congressional investigators that was made public Saturday evening.

You can google it and easily find every news agency other than the fake news organizations are reporting it from his testimony last week.

Comey did not "admit under oath last week that the FBI DID NOT follow procedure." He admitted that certain portions of the dossier were not verified prior to issuance of the warrant. I was asking for a source quote because you said Comey admitted under oath that the FBI didn't follow procedure, when in reality Comey explicitly said the process was not abused.

Why would a warrant application require full verification prior to issuance of a warrant? If I say you have drugs, and I'm a credible source and the police have a reason to believe me, the warrant is, at least in part, necessary to verify my statement. My statement does not have to have been verified prior to the issuance of a warrant, and in fact it cannot have been verified prior to the issuance of a warrant.

Presumably, the FBI regularly submits FISA applications relying on testimony from other sources, testimony that has not yet been found to be 100% verified. That's just the nature of warrant applications. That's how the process works. Nunes et al. are yelling about the FISA application because it's an easy concept to understand. You can boil it down to "this investigation wouldn't be happening without Clinton-funded opposition research." It's a statement that lacks any kind of nuance or precision, but it's easy to sell. The reality is that Comey also testified that the FISA process was not abused. And I would bet dollars to donuts that any number of other FBI agents would say the vast majority of their FISA applications include source information that has not yet been proved conclusively true.

Comey did not "admit under oath last week that the FBI DID NOT follow procedure." He admitted that certain portions of the dossier were not verified prior to issuance of the warrant. I was asking for a source quote because you said Comey admitted under oath that the FBI didn't follow procedure, when in reality Comey explicitly said the process was not abused.

Why would a warrant application require full verification prior to issuance of a warrant? If I say you have drugs, and I'm a credible source and the police have a reason to believe me, the warrant is, at least in part, necessary to verify my statement. My statement does not have to have been verified prior to the issuance of a warrant, and in fact it cannot have been verified prior to the issuance of a warrant.

Presumably, the FBI regularly submits FISA applications relying on testimony from other sources, testimony that has not yet been found to be 100% verified. That's just the nature of warrant applications. That's how the process works. Nunes et al. are yelling about the FISA application because it's an easy concept to understand. You can boil it down to "this investigation wouldn't be happening without Clinton-funded opposition research." It's a statement that lacks any kind of nuance or precision, but it's easy to sell. The reality is that Comey also testified that the FISA process was not abused. And I would bet dollars to donuts that any number of other FBI agents would say the vast majority of their FISA applications include source information that has not yet been proved conclusively true.

There is a HUGE difference between verifying something is 100% true and a basic understanding of who the source is, who paid for the information, and what their motive may be.

Using your example with drugs, if you say I have drugs and you are a credible source so a warrant would be issued is one thing. Now if the detective, when obtaining the warrant, knowingly leaves out the fact that you're dating my ex-wife, you despise me, and have stated you will do anything in your power to see to it that I go to jail, that is an abuse of the process. That is the easily understood FISA abuse that everyone without TDS can comprehend.

When Comey states under oath that the FBI followed procedure, and that the notion of FISA abuse is nonsense, and then later states that the dosier was used knowing that it hadn't been verified, that instantly becomes perjury since those things aren't all truthful. Then you factor in the past lying, leaking, fired for inappropriate behavior, documented bias against the target of this investigation, and you have evidence of FISA abuse resulting in illegally spying on an American citizen during a Presidential campaign in order to benefit Hillary Clinton.

That is highly illegal and everyone involved needs to be held accountable. This should be of huge concern to every citizen of the US. This is the weaponizing of federal law enforcement agencies against citizens to impact an election. This should be way more concerning than what the Russians did during the 2016 election.

Comment

No nuance needed. Please provide the source where the FBI/DOJ admitted on the FISA application that their source was being paid for by the opposition candidate (Hillary Clinton).

I can provide you multiple sources that report Comey stated that the dossier was unverified. You already posted one. There are also multiple sources that state Christopher Steele himself has admitted much of the dossier was unverified. Was that information provided on the FISA application?

So your assertion is Comey was playing word games with the FISA application by saying it was "coming to us from a reliable source with a track record" but didn't divulge the facts that the source would do anything in his power to prevent Trump from becoming POTUS and conveniently left out that Trump's opponent paid for the information? WOW, that is some honesty from the FBI and DOJ. Very trusting...

It's like we take one step forward and two back. I thought we had already gotten over the fact that the underlying facts were "unverified" since the FBI trusted the source. If you're willing to admit that you can apply for a FISA warrant with unverified factual information so long as you trust the source, why would it ever be relevant that the facts are unverified?

The FISA application specifically says the source was "hired" to perform research on Trump's ties to Russia. Of course he didn't divulge that the source would do anything in his power to prevent Trump from becoming president. That's not what he was hired to do.

One, and there were several others, of the reasons I voted for the current President is because he had the cajones to express the belief that the justice system is rigged for some people, and at the same time rigged "against" others (bias). What we are seeing now is just another demonstration of that principle:

Comment

When the **** hit the fan, I would have paid anything to see Trump stand up and say, "Welp, I guess we're done here. Typical Democrat obstructionist bullshit. I'm glad the American public could get a glimpse of what I deal with every single day." Then he'd lift one leg slightly and break wind like a boss before walking away.

Out of trillions and trillions of government spending, he's asking for 5 freaking billion dollars to help stop illegal border crossings.

Comment

Before we shut down the government, please pass legislation that only essential members of the government that continue to work will get paid during the shut down and there will be NO BACK PAY once the government re-opens. If you work, you still get paid (even during the shutdown) if you don't work, you don't get paid.

Great video! I see a tangerine man baby that doesn't understand how legislation works throwing a temper tantrum because he can't just get his way even though his side controls everything right now. So he's threatening to take his ball and shut down the government over a border wall that he said we were never going to pay for in the first place.

LoL! And I see a tangerine Alpha sitting next to a couple career political Betas who understands that he doesn't have the 60 votes to pass his wall in the senate but would like to get it on national television that these are the people you blame when a terrorist or eventual pandemic-spawning illegal finally gets through the Swiss cheese border and ends the life of thousands of innocent Americans.